Teacher Assignments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

Bite me. Our family has made lemonade out of very sour lemons and I won't apologize for wanting my child to get to keep his teacher. Nor will you shame me into being quiet.

You will be wasting your energy. Your kicking, screaming and "going nuts" will not change anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I just want to say how much it sucks that teachers haven't been given any sort of insight about where they'll be spending their days starting in a couple of weeks. This is your career! This whole plan is so messed up.

you do realize that delays in staffing assignments are being directly caused by WTU’s lawsuit throwing out DCPS’s teacher survey, right?

You mean the successful challenge to DCPS’s unlawful survey? Nope, the responsibility for this mess is on DCPS and the mayor. Parent here.

WTU attacked DCPS’s survey of teacher availability and got it thrown out. Nobody except you can twist that into “on DCPS.” The fact is that WTU is chosing to be as obstructionist as possible, which forces DCPS to act without teacher input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

Bite me. Our family has made lemonade out of very sour lemons and I won't apologize for wanting my child to get to keep his teacher. Nor will you shame me into being quiet.

You don’t have to apologize but please don’t pretend to care about “equity” blah blah blah. It’s all about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I just want to say how much it sucks that teachers haven't been given any sort of insight about where they'll be spending their days starting in a couple of weeks. This is your career! This whole plan is so messed up.

you do realize that delays in staffing assignments are being directly caused by WTU’s lawsuit throwing out DCPS’s teacher survey, right?

But lawsuits are only a real threat if valid. DCPS has done something they shouldn't have.

Labor law is pretty opaque so I don’t know. But people crying now about getting assignments late need to understand it is due to WTU’s choice of tactics to use any leverage available. Possible to increase member discontent deliberately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

Bite me. Our family has made lemonade out of very sour lemons and I won't apologize for wanting my child to get to keep his teacher. Nor will you shame me into being quiet.

You're crude but right to speak out.

My 8 year-old, who just graduated from ELL services this quarter has had a hell of a time adjusting to DL. Only in the last few weeks has she settled down and cheered up, with much support from a great teacher for her. Change the teacher and we could be back to screaming fits and tears daily. When I asked our pediatrician about counseling she told me the first appointment we could get for a pediatric counselor in her big practice was Christmas week (and that was a freagin Zoom appointment).

Bowser, DCPS and WTU could have done so much better by the kids.

[Anonymous]

Until March 2020, all DCPS teachers were in-person. Those who have excelled at DL should remain that way. Those who have not been able to make the adjustment well should be the ones put back in the classroom. If their administrators have been doing their jobs, they should know who falls into which camp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

I’m not trying to stop any SN kids from getting in person classes. I am a proponent of them going into school because I know their circumstances demand it. What I am saying is my kids may lose great teachers in the process and that is going to upset them. Why can’t I voice that? Why does it necessarily mean I don’t want any kids getting in-person lessons?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

I’m not trying to stop any SN kids from getting in person classes. I am a proponent of them going into school because I know their circumstances demand it. What I am saying is my kids may lose great teachers in the process and that is going to upset them. Why can’t I voice that? Why does it necessarily mean I don’t want any kids getting in-person lessons?

Not to mention the SN kids who don’t ‘win the lottery’ and the many non-IEP kids who are miserably failing at DL but have no chance of in-person.

This plan is positive for some, but it is not good enough because it causes too disruptive for the modest good it achieves.

It’s ridiculous to say the negatives are unmentionable because it does some positive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

Different poster.
Are you saying that the only way for the couple of SN kids in each current general ed class to access the curriculum is to be taught in-person, in a group of 8-10 kids, with one of the current general ed teachers who usually teach 22 kids each? And you're judging parents who are worried about their own kids continuing distance learning in a brand new schedule of 38 kids Teams meetings? Our kids may not have special needs, and they may have done well with distance learning so far, but a Teams class of 38 elementary students is not going to go well.
As those old white guys like to politely say to each other, "Come on, man!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

I’m not trying to stop any SN kids from getting in person classes. I am a proponent of them going into school because I know their circumstances demand it. What I am saying is my kids may lose great teachers in the process and that is going to upset them. Why can’t I voice that? Why does it necessarily mean I don’t want any kids getting in-person lessons?

+1
Why don't we have all the subs on board instead of reassigning teachers from gen ed virtual Paul to teach in person SN Jack?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

This, exactly! I'm the parent of SN kids and I can't even interact with the idiotic parents at our WOTP elementary who parrot the WTU talking points. How about we shut down schools "only when it's safe" for my kids to access education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can only imagine the onslaught of angry emails and phone calls when these announcements are made. If my child loses his amazing teacher who has been rocking it at DL I'm going to go nuts.

so privileged. that teacher is going to teach kids who need in-person learning. but hey it’s never been any secret that you all resent “those” kids.

come on, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know everybody wants whats best for SN and at-risk kids, while also not wanting their own kids to lose out on teachers they really love. No need for the hate.

I mean you’re literally trying to stop SN and homeless kids from getting the support they need because you don’t want to switch teachers. It is mutually exclusive. You think your child’s “love” for their teacher means SN kids shouldn’t be able to access the curriculum.

Different poster.
Are you saying that the only way for the couple of SN kids in each current general ed class to access the curriculum is to be taught in-person, in a group of 8-10 kids, with one of the current general ed teachers who usually teach 22 kids each? And you're judging parents who are worried about their own kids continuing distance learning in a brand new schedule of 38 kids Teams meetings? Our kids may not have special needs, and they may have done well with distance learning so far, but a Teams class of 38 elementary students is not going to go well.
As those old white guys like to politely say to each other, "Come on, man!"

Old white guys? Polite? Ok.

Also yes, even a gen ed teacher will give SN kids something better than DL can. Also they ALL WON'T be SN kids. Who's perpetuating this lie here?
Ged ed teachers should also be able to differentiate, not as good as Sped teachers but they should still be able to do it.

Online will require a lot of innovation and teachers have historically been charged with this task.

[Anonymous]

How do people think this is a good plan for Students with SN or ELL? They are still receiving all of their special instruction virtually. At best they are getting babysitters. Babysitters who will be setting them up on iPads to receive there services.

Also WTU has been fighting DCPS for months because DCPS violated the law. That is literally what the PERB review showed. Even the council members during the Town Hall Friday expressed dismay at DCPS poor planning and lack of transparency around reopening schools. So blame DCPS for the delay not the people holding them accountable. Unions were created to protect people from unsafe working conditions. Sounds like they are doing their job.

So say you want your children out of your house, say you want things back to normal but don’t say this plan is good for students. And its not safe for anybody. 100’s of kids and teachers in one building. I dont think so. Not for me or my child with SN.